Does anyone pretend KOTCS didn't happen?

Montana Smith said:

Me, too, and he was even before my time!

Click to expand...

I joined The Raven in 2008, and he was under the name Sankara at that time, and I only remember seeing his posts after he got banned. But he trolls the KOTCS IMDb forum, and any Harrison Ford forum on the net. He also comments on Sideshow Collectibles' website regularly, saying nobody wants KOTCS merchandise. He said on IMDb months and months ago that he is still on here under a new name, so I still fear he is still here...

His favorite things to say are;

" "Skull" is not an Indiana Jones movie because there is no Indiana Jones in it. It is a fact that if you are an Indy fan, you must hate "Skull".

And "I'm so proud that ALL Indy fans hate "Skull". It proves that it is not an Indiana Jones movie."

He's such an ass

Dr.Jonesy said:

I joined The Raven in 2008, and he was under the name Sankara at that time, and I only remember seeing his posts after he got banned. But he trolls the KOTCS IMDb forum, and any Harrison Ford forum on the net. He also comments on Sideshow Collectibles' website regularly, saying nobody wants KOTCS merchandise. He said on IMDb months and months ago that he is still on here under a new name, so I still fear he is still here...

His favorite things to say are;

" "Skull" is not an Indiana Jones movie because there is no Indiana Jones in it. It is a fact that if you are an Indy fan, you must hate "Skull".

And "I'm so proud that ALL Indy fans hate "Skull". It proves that it is not an Indiana Jones movie."

He's such an ass

Click to expand...

haha, i totally saw that on imbd. that's how i found this place!

I would agree that the "Quicksand Scene" comments he made were silly, but it was akin to the idea of him slightly becoming his father at times.


That's exactly my opinion. He is more than his father in "Kingdom". And this out of character in my opinion.

Is the same Luke Skywalker in "Star Wars" than in "Return of the Jedi"?

Is the same "Doc" Emmet Brown in "Back to the future part 1" than in "Back to the future part 3"?

Is the same Michael Corleone in "The Godfather part 1" than in "Part 3"?

Sean Connery was the academic side of Indiana Jones, the side we see in the classroom scenes. Connery was James Bond so it was funny to see him as a professor. The same evolution with Harrison, the academic side won over the adventurer side sometimes, specially after looking to the skull (The aliens were archaeologists also)

agull said:

No, he is still the same in Temple and Crusade. But he is different in Skull. He is more like his father in "Skull". He is no hero, he is not witty - and he is not vulnerable enough in Skull.

Click to expand...

Of course he's more like his father in KOTCS.... as he's considerably older than he was in TLC. You may not like it, but I think there is little benefit in pretending Harrison Ford (or the character for that matter) is the same man he was in the first three movies. However, I think you've highlighted (not particularly well mind) a basic underlying problem with KOTCS (or any future Ford Indy movie) i.e. a considerably older Indiana Jones character (and leading actor) ultimately undermines both the credibility of the action and the given situations the character finds himself in.

Matt deMille said:

A lot of people hated KOTCS (I didn't -- I liked it). It's easy to blame the alien concept, but really, this may have been the real problem -- Indy isn't quite Indy. Sort of like the problem with the Star Wars prequels -- the characters are kinda flat. It seems Lucas and Koepp were trying to "add character" in every way but the right one -- Indy. They gave him a son, a wife, an old pal, an old traitor, all things Indy can interact with, yet semeed to take Indy himself for granted. Perhaps people would have liked KOTCS better if there were less supporting characters and a bit more devotion to Indy himself. Or maybe this problem can be looked at a different way, in that, maybe Indy's character was indeed there, but just didn't have the screen time to shine, sharing the stage with four others. You notice how in ROTLA it was just him and one other at some point, and this is the movie that made us care (if we didn't, there wouldn't have been a second film). Each film added one additional supporting character, and the movie became less about Indy's heroics and more about his relationships. KOTCS is simply where this is the biggest problem because it has the most characters. So maybe it's not Indy directly, but everyone around him. Sometimes less is more.

Click to expand...

Most people seem to rate TLC highly... and that had a similar ensemble feel to KOTCS. If anything, I'd posit that Sean Connery stole many of the key scenes. If there is an issue with Indy's screen time in KOTCS, I think it's that he's not being displaced by a bigger/better actor such as he was with Connery... and to take the point further... I always thought they pitched the character of Mutt too young. For example, bring in actors of Dicaprio or Robert Downey Jnr's age to play Indy's son, and the quality would have suddenly risen (IMHO).

If Indy has a son around 40 years old, that son would've had to have been born around 1920 (in the Indy timeline).......and that might complicate things. In the first three movies, Indy and Marion would've already had like a 16 year old son. Marion didn't look old enough to have a 16 yr old son, and if Marion isn't the other mother, I don't know if it has the same effect.......you see where I'm going with this.

In addition, a 35-40 year old man has largely already grown up and has become the man he is going to become.........the fact that Mutt is still only about 20 years old, he's still at this very impressionable age where he needs a father, and I like that angle in the story.

And I don't think Shia was a problem at all........if you're gonna bring someone like Robert Downey Jr. in, he'd almost work better as Indy's newfound brother or something. Remember the rumors of Kevin Costner playing Indy's brother circa 2004.



And as far as Indy using the phrase "This is intolerable".......I'll just echo what's been said, but it's shades of Indy becoming like his father (but Indy is still Indy). And now Indy has a son just like he was to his father.

Haven't you ever seen yourself emulating certain characteristics of your father as you grow up? You see things come full circle in a way? Again, I love this family angle to the Indy films. 'Last Crusade' is my favorite. This was a good addition.

Indy is more like his father in "Skull"...


So, twenty years before "Crusade" - Jones Senior (Connery) was like Indy in "Raiders"?

agull said:

Indy is more like his father in "Skull"...


So, twenty years before "Crusade" - Jones Senior (Connery) was like Indy in "Raiders"?

Click to expand...

They're not the same characters.......Indy is still Indy.

I'm merely saying certain characteristics start resonating in Indy - enough to remind you of his father.

Nobody is saying he is Henry Sr.........I can't see Henry Sr. getting in a fist fight with Dovenchko or swinging through rafters. Can you?

Cole said:

If Indy has a son around 40 years old, that son would've had to have been born around 1920 (in the Indy timeline).......and that might complicate things. In the first three movies, Indy and Marion would've already had like a 16 year old son. Marion didn't look old enough to have a 16 yr old son, and if Marion isn't the other mother, I don't know if it has the same effect.......you see where I'm going with this.

In addition, a 35-40 year old man has largely already grown up and has become the man he is going to become.........the fact that Mutt is still only about 20 years old, he's still at this very impressionable age where he needs a father, and I like that angle in the story.

And I don't think Shia was a problem at all........if you're gonna bring someone like Robert Downey Jr. in, he'd almost work better as Indy's newfound brother or something. Remember the rumors of Kevin Costner playing Indy's brother circa 2004.

.

Click to expand...

I think there are plenty of older actors out there who, like Ford, can play 10/15 years younger than they actually are (as I wasn't suggesting playing the character as a 40 something, rather someone in the late 20's/early 30's who could intellectually challenge Indy/Ford). Whereas in KOTCS, Mutt is written (and Shia plays it) very much like a teenager. I'd add that there is nothing wrong with the role reversal father/son angle of KOTCS. There is nothing wrong with Shia as Mutt per se. However, I think the consequence of bringing in a younger actor (and playing the character younger) is that it can trivialise the relationship, and the opportunity for some real acting dynamics/fireworks is reduced.

Of course, if one finds the existing dynamic more than adequate, then that is fine... my suggestion is purely a speculative one i.e. to position ideas that could have improved the movie further.

agull said:

Indy is more like his father in "Skull"...


So, twenty years before "Crusade" - Jones Senior (Connery) was like Indy in "Raiders"?

Click to expand...

Watch the YIJC to see what Henry, Sr. is like twenty years before LC.

agull said:

Indy is more like his father in "Skull"...


So, twenty years before "Crusade" - Jones Senior (Connery) was like Indy in "Raiders"?

Click to expand...

So you object to seeing any character progression at all? Indy must be frozen in time?

agull said:

...he is not "Indy" anymore.

I guess the "Skull"-Indy would work together with Nazis in "Raiders".

he is still the same in Temple and Crusade. But he is different in Skull. ...He is no hero

Imagine the "Skull"-Indy at the beginning of "Temple": "No, Shorty! You can't drive the car.

In "Raiders" Indy pretends to be an arab and to be an german soldier. So it's not out of character to pretend a scottish Lord in "Crusade"...But saying "Intolerable!" ... it out of character.

Indy is not the same great hero in "Skull"

Click to expand...

I'm sorry they let you back on the board. Have to add you to the ignore list - again.

Indy is still Indy? Come on... and what about the "Intolerable!" or the Quicksand-Scene? Indy is not witty or cool in this movie.

agull said:

Indy is still Indy? Come on... and what about the "Intolerable!" or the Quicksand-Scene? Indy is not witty or cool in this movie.

Click to expand...

We explained the "Intolerable" and quicksand scene. And your last sentence...whatever.

You had more points when you said that it was "Just your opinion."

agull said:

Indy is still Indy? Come on... and what about the "Intolerable!" or the Quicksand-Scene? Indy is not witty or cool in this movie.

Click to expand...

I think the point everyone's trying to make is that he is still Indy, he's just turning into a crotchety old man, like so many people do as they get older. I don't think you can really expect someone to act exactly the same for their whole life. People tend to get more grumpy and less witty in old age. His "intolerable!" thing shows that. Also, being older means he's not able to do as much adventuring as he used to, so he's probably spent more time teaching and is more academically-inclined than action-inclined. Hence his "dry sand pit" explanation to Mutt. I'm sure that was intended to be funny - he's in the middle of danger and just starts lecturing about sand lol. I found it hilarious.

Bottom line, it would have been silly if Indy was exactly the same in KOTCS. He's gotten older, and the fact is that when people get old they start acting like old people. The movie accurately depicts that and is better for it.

mattzilla2010 said:

I think the point everyone's trying to make is that he is still Indy, he's just turning into a crotchety old man, like so many people do as they get older. I don't think you can really expect someone to act exactly the same for their whole life. People tend to get more grumpy and less witty in old age. His "intolerable!" thing shows that. Also, being older means he's not able to do as much adventuring as he used to, so he's probably spent more time teaching and is more academically-inclined than action-inclined. Hence his "dry sand pit" explanation to Mutt. I'm sure that was intended to be funny - he's in the middle of danger and just starts lecturing about sand lol. I found it hilarious.

Bottom line, it would have been silly if Indy was exactly the same in KOTCS. He's gotten older, and the fact is that when people get old they start acting like old people. The movie accurately depicts that and is better for it.

Click to expand...

Well said.

To quote from Cool Hand Luke:

"What we got here is a failure to communicate. Some men you can't reach, that is they just don't listen when you talk reasonable so you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it, well he gets it, and I don't like it any better than you men."

You explainded nothing. This was just your explantation. It makes no sense that Indy act like his father because he is totally different.

By the way: Ford said that Indy is still the same in this movie. So there is no character development or something...

agull said:

You explainded nothing. This was just your explantation. It makes no sense that Indy act like his father because he is totally different.

By the way: Ford said that Indy is still the same in this movie. So there is no character development or something...

Click to expand...

Where is the facepalm smiley when you need it...?

Ford said Indy is still the same. What do you say about it?

agull said:

Ford said Indy is still the same. What do you say about it?

Click to expand...

I say he's right. Indy is still Indy, and that's true. And part of being Indy is about evolving. From the Fortune and Glory seeker to the selfless hero in TOD, to his skepticism about God to his respect for His power in ROTLA, to his broken relationship with his father to a mended one in LC, and from his adventure life with nothing and nobody left to his becoming a father(a little like his own) and gaining a family in KOTCS.

What I say about you is that you seem to only accept one type of answer, and that answer must always be against KOTCS. So, basically there is no talking to you.